20 Sep 2009

JJ the clown, part 2

Diary of events:

First, Justice Narine referred the affidavit of Abu Bakr (in which he alleges that Patrick Manning (then Prime Minister) made a deal with him to forgive the payments owed to the state in return for 'muscle' at the general elections in support of the PNM) to the DPP who in turn referred it for investigation to the chief duncey.

It was funny seeing the way Pa-trick lost his cool and appeared goggle-eyed as if pressure was being applied about his middle... much like a car wheel running over a crapaud, I imagine.

Then, JJ the joker stood up in Parliament (at the urgings of the defendant-to-be, Patrick Manning) and chastised the sitting Judge (who, unfortunately cannot publicly comment and defend himself). JJ (unfortunately) claims Parliamentary privilege, and his biased and idiotic rants were approved by the Speaker, Barendra Sinanan. Of course they were!!

Barry is a registered, known PNM member.

Barry has a record of being partisan, biased in favour of the PNM, if you want it more succinctly.

The Law Association then issued a statement in which they condemned the clown JJ for his rant, and misleading the Parliament.

“If the Attorney General had a difficulty with the direction of (then) Mr Justice Narine it was certainly open to him, as a party to the proceedings, to appeal against that direction to the Court of Appeal,” the release, signed by Association President Martin Daly SC, noted. “To opt instead to level a public rebuke of the Judge was wrong and had the tendency to bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

“It is our considered view that the Attorney General was wrong in law…to suggest to the House that Mr Justice Narine (as he then was) had defied the order of the Court of Appeal and the Privy Council. While the affidavit in question had been struck out and removed from the record, that did not preclude the Learned Judge, if he thought necessary, from dealing with it in the way that he did.”

Citing the British case of Midland Bank Trust v Green, Daly continued, “Mr Justice Narine (as he then was) had jurisdiction to have directed that the contents of the affidavit be referred to the Commissioner and the DPP. Indeed to do otherwise would arguably be contrary to the role of a judge as a guardian of the rule of law.” The body also noted that while Jeremie made a statement on the issue last Monday in Parliament, generally, under the Standing Order 36 (10), “members of Parliament are prohibited from criticising judges” unless a motion is moved for that purpose.
(Wanna bet he is never sent to the Privileges Committee for disciplining?).

Now, note that the position of the Law Association is that JJ is wrong in law, eh. Not that he is promoting propaganda (as he clearly is) or any other such position it could have claimed. No, the LA stuck to a non-partisan, non-biased position and clearly gave examples to show that its position has merit.

On the other hand, the quick response by the PNM (mere hours after the Law Association's) is one of sheer propaganda, bias, political mischievousness, devious, underhanded.... you get the point by now, I am sure.
“The PNM notes with concern recent developments which have seen the hijacking of the once venerable Law Association by a bunch of political opportunists bent on engaging the duly elected Government in political warfare,” the release, emailed by PNM staff member Tricia Harripaul and headed “PNM Condemns Political Law Association” reads:

“The PNM is… not surprised that the Law Association, which under its current leadership is now openly hostile to the PNM and its leader, continues to parrot positions indistinguishable from that of the Opposition parties.

“The PNM has every confidence that the discerning public will recognise the gamesmanship being employed by the political masqueraders and will reject them as it has consistently rejected all previous masqueraders brave enough to take off their masks or legal robes to engage in overt political activity.

“Given the knee jerk hostility of the Law Association leadership to the PNM and its leader, it came as no surprise that the Association would find some way to justify the extra-legal intervention of now Appeal Court Judge Rajendra Narine in using an affidavit that had been struck out by superior courts. While not entirely unexpected, the attempt to attack the Honourable Attorney General for exposing Justice Narine’s legal adventurism, is none the less deplorable.”

“In arrogantly seeking to challenge the right of politicians to speak on legal matters, the Law Association has also bordered on contempt of Parliament,” the party claimed, saying Jeremie’s statement in Parliament was “approved by the Speaker”.
There is no evidence to back up the claims of the PNM statement, and it is clearly a media release designed to cast doubt on the validity of that said by the LA. Smear the messengers and the message becomes tainted also. A classic tactic of the PNM since days immemorial!

Of course, lately ANY criticism of the PNM (and/or its members) have been deemed to be "political opportunists bent on engaging the duly elected Government in political warfare". So, we must simply bend over and take it up the nether hole, whatever the PNM feels is right for us. We must NEVER question, criticise or condemn what the goodly Christian has in store for us. It's a case of 'grease yuh bam bam, and grease it good!'.

The Government is at an all-time low in performance, ideas, vision, morality, perception, transparency, delivery,... shit, I can't even begin to list my list. But hey, think of the opposite, it's easier. The PNM government is at an all-time HIGH in terms of corruption and tiefing.

Next... JJ, the sitcom.

Comments